star Wars Missile Program

dream431ca

dream431ca

Newbie
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
3,383
Reaction score
0
How do you guys feel about this program??

I personally would not like to see missiles in space. First of all, I live in Canada and I would not like to see missiles of any sort flying over any part of the country. Second of all, Weapons in space is not a act of peace...it's an act of war. And lastly, we already have Earth armed to the Teeth with missiles and also Nuclear missiles and we don't need Space armed as well.
 
Weapons in space are a baaad idea... read Day of the Triffids! :eek:

It seems like a waste of money to me tbh. For one thing the biggest real nuclear threat to the U.S. would be if terrorists smuggled a warhead into the country and detonated it, Star Wars does jack to prevent that. The money could be spent in so many better ways - even better defense measures, such as Coast Guard or FBI. They are more important in this modern age than being able to shoot down ICBMs.
 
I personally don't see the reason for a STAR WARS program.

Missiles are old, and I feel that modern warfare may render them obsolete.

Think about it... How many sea ports does the US have? How many cargo ships enter these ports every day? How many are inspected before they dock? Not very many...

All an enemy has to do is load a nuke on a cargo ship and detonate it when it docks. Same goes for any other WMD.

*Edit - Day of the Triffids is a great book! One of my favourites ;)
 
dream431ca said:
How do you guys feel about this program??

I personally would not like to see missiles in space. First of all, I live in Canada and I would not like to see missiles of any sort flying over any part of the country. Second of all, Weapons in space is not a act of peace...it's an act of war. And lastly, we already have Earth armed to the Teeth with missiles and also Nuclear missiles and we don't need Space armed as well.
Click to expand...
What the **** are you talking about?
 
dont worry, we wont be affected... all the warheads the US have are pointed at the French :D
 
shhhh.... lol, im pretending we're miles away...in a galaxy far far away.... *gets out lightsaber*
hmm time to play KoTOR :D
 
dream431ca said:
I personally would not like to see missiles in space. First of all, I live in Canada and I would not like to see missiles of any sort flying over any part of the country. Second of all, Weapons in space is not a act of peace...it's an act of war. And lastly, we already have Earth armed to the Teeth with missiles and also Nuclear missiles and we don't need Space armed as well.
Click to expand...

#1: Are you talking about the Strategic Defense Initiative program or the National Missile Defense program? The effect of the programs is the same, but in essence, SDI had the posibility weapons based in space while the newer program NMD (technically still SDI, but not really) uses recycled ground launched ICBM's with orbital tracking.

This matters becaue if your talking about SDI, then weapons woudl orbit over canada, if your talking about NMD then they wouldnt.
#2. How is putting weapons in space an act of war? Against who?

#3. How would putting weaons in space matter since the time difference in an attack with those weapons and ground based ones would be in the range of 5 min?

Eejit said:
It seems like a waste of money to me tbh. For one thing the biggest real nuclear threat to the U.S. would be if terrorists smuggled a warhead into the country and detonated it, Star Wars does jack to prevent that.
Click to expand...

Did you know that North Koreas dong is long enough to reach the US? Yes, the North Korean Dong missile has the range to reach the United States.

Im just pointing out that its not as if there is absolutly no reason this program exists.
 
ductonius said:
Did you know that North Koreas dong is long enough to reach the US? Yes, the North Korean Dong missile has the range to reach the United States.

Im just pointing out that its not as if there is absolutly no reason this program exists.
Click to expand...
That's not even as dangerous as the Cold War though. There's no MAD, since Korea have relatively few long-range weapons (afaik), if they launch against the U.S. only the destruction of 1 country is assured. Even if they did have enough to wipe out the U.S. in one blow, and wanted to do so, they have no second strike ability, whereas the U.S. does.
Mad as Kim may be, he's not that stupid. :hmph:
 
I ask you:

Is it right to pursue your own ideal of security if it increases global tensions?

I know Russia for one is very uncomfortable with all this talk of ICBMs and anti-ICBM technology.
 
There are weapons in space since the 1980's, both Russia & the U.S.A. have "fake" sattelites, really space-based nuclear weapons that will detonate on impact, that would initiate descent if a clear signal from several places stops being emitted.

It's the "last resort" in case of a surprise attack by either of the powers, but it looks like Russia has many more than the U.S.A.

Now about the National Missile Defense Program, I think it's good, it's logical. Nations like North Korea or Iran won't have to worry about MAD, so a defence is necessary.
 
Pogrom said:
MAD? What is MAD?
Click to expand...
Mutually Assured Destruction.

If anything Iran and Korea have to worry about it more. For them it's just 'assured destruction', they can't destroy the U.S.A with the quantities they have, but America could destroy them both several times over.
 
Eejit said:
Mutually Assured Destruction.

If anything Iran and Korea have to worry about it more. For them it's just 'assured destruction', they can't destroy the U.S.A with the quantities they have, but America could destroy them both several times over.
Click to expand...

Well, America could destroy the world several times over...
 
Eejit said:
That's not even as dangerous as the Cold War though. There's no MAD, since Korea have relatively few long-range weapons (afaik), if they launch against the U.S. only the destruction of 1 country is assured. Even if they did have enough to wipe out the U.S. in one blow, and wanted to do so, they have no second strike ability, whereas the U.S. does.
Mad as Kim may be, he's not that stupid. :hmph:
Click to expand...

Well, you see, they dont have that capablity right now, but they may have later on. Which is why the US is developing a countermeasure right now.

In any case, this is the most benign thing the US can do to protect itself and Canada from N. Korea. Its either this or NUTS.

Pogrom said:
I know Russia for one is very uncomfortable with all this talk of ICBMs and anti-ICBM technology.
Click to expand...

Russia isnt saying squat about it since they already have a missile shield in place over Moscow.

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_security/missile_defense/page.cfm?pageID=609

Yeah, its decrepit, but its there, and active.
 
ductonius said:
Well, you see, they dont have that capablity right now, but they may have later on. Which is why the US is developing a countermeasure right now.

In any case, this is the most benign thing the US can do to protect itself and Canada from N. Korea. Its either this or NUTS.
Click to expand...

If they had the capability, why would they use them? It would just be assuring their own destruction.
 
Pogrom said:
If they had the capability, why would they use them? It would just be assuring their own destruction.
Click to expand...

Well, Im sure they woudl need a good reason, since Kim Il Jong is such a stable and level headed leader.

That is to say: who knows.
 
Hmm, Luke Skywalker as the new head jedi surely wouldn't let anything of the sort happen....


Oh, not that starwars.


Has anyone played that game Warzone 2100? The story for that really sounds a like like this. It has sattelite based missiles (nuclear) and there was a fault in the system(Ok, so it was actually a man who had transfered his conciousness into computers, but it could easily have been a virus :O) which meant all missiles were launched....The subesquent counterstrikes ended with near total destruction of the human race.


Pogrom, they would want the capability to help bully non nuclear countires and threaten countries like the USA with nuclear capabilities. Although it would assure their destruction, I'm sure half the USA wouldn't be too consoled at the fact their death would mean the death of countless others.
 
ductonius said:
Well, Im sure they woudl need a good reason, since Kim Il Jong is such a stable and level headed leader.

That is to say: who knows.
Click to expand...

No matter how unstable someone is, surely they don't crave destruction.
 
Pogrom said:
No matter how unstable someone is, surely they don't crave destruction.
Click to expand...
If Kim did he would probably have made things infinitely worse than they are now in Korea, and been deposed before he'd even developed these weapons
 
Pogrom said:
No matter how unstable someone is, surely they don't crave destruction.
Click to expand...

Thats the thing about crazy people, you can't tell.

Events in the same part of the world may tip him off.

All Im saying is that its not a bad idea to protect ones self from threats, even if they are remote.
 
ductonius said:
Thats the thing about crazy people, you can't tell.
Click to expand...

The only problem I see is that creating an anti-ICBM system is inflaming world tensions and making the world a more dangerous place.
 
ductonius said:
Well then why arnt you on Russias case? They already have a functioning ABM system.
Click to expand...

Incomplete and not good yet tho. but in a way, so is the American.
 
The russian one will probably work better anyway...Simply because they seem better at making stuff.
 
Sprafa said:
Incomplete and not good yet tho. but in a way, so is the American.
Click to expand...

The Americans are simply developing thiers now. It isnt even functioning, while the Russians is. If ABM's inflame world tentions then the Russian one should be a much bigger concern than the potential American one.
 
Sprafa said:
Incomplete and not good yet tho. but in a way, so is the American.
Click to expand...

Yes, it appears that it the Russians are not seriously pursuing this project at all. From the link:

The system is still only intended to defend Moscow and is not a national missile defense.

Despite the improvements, US military and intelligence reports say the Moscow system would still be relatively easy to defeat.

However, the Defense Ministry is also unwilling to put in the amount of money necessary to keep the system operational. Instead, the Moscow system will most likely continue its decline.
Click to expand...
 
Eejit said:
1. It 'covers' 1 city.
2. It's old and outdated.
3. It never worked properly anyway
Whereas the US system, while it doesn't work at the moment, may do some day with the amount of money being poured into it.
Does that answer your question?
Click to expand...

1. Are you trying to tell me if the US used theirs to cover only DC then it would be OK?

2.A nuclear interceptor dosent become outdated. Its a rocket that gets within 1 KM of the target and explodes. It dosent need to be accurate, which is why nukes are used for them.

3. It works fine enough for the Russians to keep it active.
 
ductonius said:
1. A nuclear interceptor dosent become outdated. Its a rocket that gets within 1 KM of the target and explodes. It dosent need to be accurate, which is why nukes are used for them.

2. It works fine enough for the Russians to keep it active.

3. Are you trying to tell me if the US used theirs to cover only DC then it would be OK?
Click to expand...

1) That article stated that only the radar systems were being kept active - and those are being used for other purposes now anyway. The article stated that the actual missile interceptors are not being kept active.

2) The article also stated that the Russians only haven't de-activated it. But they are also not maintaining their flawed system.
 
Such a nice..pleasent..peaceful discussion going on here.
 
I may even retire to this thread when I have the money...Its just that pleasant.


Nice Sig by the way Sprafa...Make sure it gets changed as soon as someone complains ;)
 
I like the sig. When I read it I feel all warm inside. :p
 
Farrowlesparrow said:
Nice Sig by the way Sprafa...Make sure it gets changed as soon as someone complains ;)
Click to expand...


Oh well...I guess it inflames the ppl too much...changing it now....
 
Pogrom said:
1) That article stated that only the radar systems were being kept active - and those are being used for other purposes now anyway. The article stated that the actual missile interceptors are not being kept active.

2) The article also stated that the Russians only haven't de-activated it. But they are also not maintaining their flawed system.
Click to expand...

1. It states they are standing down *some* of the missles in the system and that the radars also perform other functions, which is not to say that they dont perform the ABM function at the same time.

2. It states that they have not put in the same ammount of money in the past. This means they are not maintaining it at the same level, but it is still active.
 
I don't have a problem with it, but I'm there are those that wont understand the humour.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

TechnoHippyChic
EA games returning to Steam
Replies
0
Views
1K
TechnoHippyChic
TechnoHippyChic
MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
Marc Laidlaw releases Half-Life 2: Episode Three's plot
Replies
32
Views
39K
BabyHeadCrab
BabyHeadCrab
B
Barking Dog Studios' work for Valve
Replies
0
Views
12K
Barnz
B
B
Half-Life's lost feature, Timeline
Replies
0
Views
6K
Barnz
B
Back
Top